Background
Martel Devante Gilliam appealed from a criminal case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The Fifth Circuit considered the appeal on its summary calendar.
Gilliam’s appointed attorney moved for leave to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California and United States v. Flores, representing that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous grounds for review. Gilliam did not file a response.
The Court’s Holding
After reviewing counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record identified in it, the Fifth Circuit agreed with counsel that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
The court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, excused counsel from further responsibilities in the case, and dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Key Takeaways
- An appointed attorney may seek withdrawal by filing an Anders brief when counsel concludes that an appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue.
- The appellate court independently reviewed counsel’s submission and the relevant portions of the record before accepting that assessment.
- The Fifth Circuit permitted counsel to withdraw and dismissed Gilliam’s appeal as frivolous.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s procedure for resolving a criminal appeal following an Anders filing. Counsel’s assessment alone did not end the case; the panel reviewed the brief and relevant record before determining that no nonfrivolous appellate issue existed.
The unpublished per curiam opinion does not address the merits of Gilliam’s conviction or sentence beyond concluding that the appeal lacked a nonfrivolous issue for review.